Northern Ireland Future Allowances and Changes

Tom Watson: A key principle of the Government's approach to addressing the health concerns of veterans of the 1990-91 Gulf conflict is that there should be appropriate research into veterans' illnesses and factors that may have a bearing on these.
	As a key part of that research, the Ministry of Defence has sponsored an investigation by the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, Porton Down, into the possible health effects of the combination of vaccines and tablets given to troops at the time of the 1990-91 Gulf conflict to protect them against the threat of biological and chemical warfare. The main body of work involved monitoring multiple factors in marmosets for up to 18 months following the administration of vaccines and/or pyridostigmine bromide (the active ingredient in nerve agent pre-treatment tablets). Interim results were announced on1 April 2003, official report, column, 55WS.
	Papers reporting final results from two elements of the main study have now been published in the online version of the journal "Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior" and hard copy publication will follow. A summary of the papers is available on the "Articlesin Press" section of the journal's website: www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00913057. The papers report that there were no long-term changes of biological significance in cognition, muscle function, general health, brain electrical activity and sleep that could be attributed to administration of vaccines and/or pyridostigmine bromide.
	The publication of these findings in a peer-reviewed journal should be welcomed by Gulf veterans in addressing a key area of concern to them. It represents a further step towards meeting the Department's commitment to investigate these issues. Further results on the immunological aspects of the study will be published in due course.

Ian Pearson: Defra has today published a consultation paper on proposals for managing the coexistence of GM and non-GM crops in England, should GM crops be grown here commercially in due course. The paper is consistent with the Government's overall policy on GM crops, as set out in the parliamentary statement made by then Defra Secretary of State, Margaret Beckett, on 9 March 2004.
	The proposals relate to managing coexistence between farms and focus on the specific measures that would be needed for crops of maize, beet, potato and oilseed rape. It is proposed that the key measures required for an effective co-existence regime will be implemented on a statutory basis, with other, less significant measures to be applied via an industry code of practice.
	The Defra paper also seeks views on a number of related issues:
	whether special rules should apply for coexistence between GM and organic crops:
	options for compensating financial losses that non-GM farmers might face due to the presence of GM material in their crops
	whether there should be a public GM crop register
	guidance to farmers on voluntary GM-free zones
	No commercial GM cultivation is expected in the UK before 2009 at the earliest, but we need to prepare for this possibility in good time, so that farmers are clear what rules would apply.
	Copies of the consultation paper will be deposited in the Libraries of both Houses and will also be available on the Defra website at http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/gm/crops/index.htm. The deadline for responses to the paper is 20 October 2006.

Ian Pearson: My noble Friend the Minister of State Lord Rooker has today published the Government's response to the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) report "Crop Spraying and the Health of Residents and Bystanders". This response sets out the Government's view on the recommendations made by the Royal Commission and indicates how we intend to address them. I have placed copies of the response in the Library of each House.
	Firstly, I would like to thank the Royal Commission for producing this report which was requested by the right. hon Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth (Alun Michael) when Minister for Rural Affairs and Local Environment Quality, to examine the science on which the current pesticide approvals system is based and the reasons for people's concerns about possible adverse health effects from pesticide spraying.
	The Government recognise the clearly genuine concerns of some residents and bystanders about the spraying of pesticides, Government can, and will, do more to address these concerns.
	I firmly believe that these concerns are best addressed at the local level through dialogue between residents and farmers to identify and understand the issues and to develop mutually agreeable solutions. I also believe that this can be achieved most rapidly through a voluntary approach that allows for innovative and flexible solutions.
	Existing voluntary schemes such as Farm Assurance and the Voluntary Initiative have demonstrated how effective non-statutory approaches can be in changing behaviour. I want to see schemes such as these playing a crucial role in ensuring that both farmers and the public can have a greater mutual understanding of the problems they each face. These schemes have the potential to provide farmers both with the practical support and the incentive to be good neighbours in this regard and I will be discussing with these organisations and others how this might be achieved.
	I believe that the proposals set out in the Government's response, a number of which are already underway, can achieve the majority of outcomes envisaged by the Royal Commission without theneed for additional burdensome regulation on the agricultural sector.
	The Government have also noted the concern of both the Royal Commission and some members of the public with how the risks to residents and bystanders are considered in the approvals process. To address this concern I have requested a complete review of the model used to assess resident and bystander exposure as part of the pesticide approvals process.
	The current approvals process is adequate with clear safety margins built in. However, I recognise that it needs to be more clearly demonstrated to the public that approvals are based on high quality underpinning science. To address this the revised exposure model will give more explicit consideration to a wider range of possible exposure routes and will reflect modern farming practices. The research to develop this model has already begun. A former member of the Royal Commission was one of the peer reviewers for the proposal before it was approved and Defra's Chief Scientific Adviser will ensure the development of the model meets acceptable scientific standards.
	The UK is also taking a primary role on this issue in Europe, taking the lead in revising the guidance on acceptable exposure limits, including the assessment of resident and bystander exposure, for the European Commission.
	The Government have considered the findings ofthe report very thoroughly alongside additional independent scientific advice. The Department of Health has sought the views of the Committees on Toxicity and on Carcinogenicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment on the report's health recommendations and Defra has additionally considered advice from the Chief Scientific Adviser and the Advisory Committee on Pesticides on the wider recommendations of the report. In addition to this scientific advice we have also considered the views of interested parties from all sides of the debate.
	The scientific advice we have received is clear that there is insufficient evidence to support the Royal Commission's recommendations for additional regulatory measures on safety grounds. Introducing regulations for other reasons such as perceived nuisance from spraying would be incompatible with the Government's Better Regulation policy. We have therefore decided against introducing any new regulations at this time.

Tony McNulty: The Parental Compensation Order (PCO) is provided for by sections 13A to 13E of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 ("CDA 1998) which were inserted by section 144 of and Schedule 10 to the Serious and Organisation Crime and Police Act 2005.
	The PCO powers will be commenced initially in 10 local authority areas (Gateshead, Hampshire, Hertfordshire, Nottinghamshire, Worcestershire, Wandsworth, Southwark, Leicester, South Tyneside and York). The use, impact and cost of the PCO will be evaluated as part of the wider use of early intervention.
	Attempts to secure voluntary reparation should always be made. The PCO should be used only where that approach fails and when its use would be desirable in the interests of preventing a repetition of the behaviour in question. However, we hope that the existence of the PCO will encourage reparation and wider behavioural change on a voluntary basis.
	By requiring the parent(s) or guardian(s) to pay compensation, the PCO is designed to provide compensation to those affected and to prevent further behaviour by the child of the type which caused the order to be made. The PCO will therefore encourage parents and their children to understand their responsibilities and to take responsibility for behaviour.
	A PCO is designed to be used as part of a wider strategy to increase the parents' skills and improve their child's behaviour, to address risk factors and underlying problems experienced by the child and family, to steer the child away from involvement in anti-social or offending-type behaviour, to keep the child safe and to encourage positive outcomes.
	A Magistrates' Court may make a PCO on application from a local authority when it is satisfied that the child (who must be under 10) has taken, or caused loss of or damage to property in the course of:
	committing an act which, if he had been aged 10 or over, would have constituted an offence; or
	acting in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself; and that it would be desirable to make the order in the interests of preventing a repetition of the behaviour in question.
	Before making an order the court must consider:
	the views of the person affected by the damage, loss etc about whether an order should be made in his favour; and
	the child's family circumstances and the likely effect of the order on those circumstances.
	It follows that local authority practitioners should form a view about the suitability of a PCO following assessment of the child, parents and family circumstances and in light of experience of trying to resolve the dispute on a voluntary basis. The PCO would be a viable option only with the support of the person affected by the damage, loss etc.
	The effect of a PCO is to require the parent(s)/guardian(s) of the child to pay compensation to the person affected. Compensation is limited to £5,000.In deciding the level of compensation the court must take into account:
	the value of the damage etc caused to property by the child;
	any further loss which flowed from the taking of or damage to the property, or from its loss;
	whether the child or parent has already paid any compensation and if so how much;
	whether the child or parents have made any reparation and if so what it consisted of;
	the means of the parents; and
	any lack of care on the part of the person(s) affected by the taking of the property or its loss or damage.
	The court is responsible for enforcement of the order and has the same enforcement powers as it does for fines.
	The court can make a parenting order when making a PCO provided this would be desirable in the interests of preventing a repetition of the kind of behaviour which led to the PCO being made.
	Guidance on the PCO is being completed with DfES following limited consultation with key stakeholders including the Welsh Assembly Government. Feedback from practitioners will help inform the improvementof the guidance. It is intended that there will be awider consultation exercise on the guidance before implementation of the PCO across England and Wales.

Joan Ryan: Section 37 of the Identity Cards Act 2006 requires a report to be laid before Parliament every six months, following Royal Assent, setting out the Secretary of State's estimate of the public expenditure likely to be incurred on the ID cards scheme during the 10 years beginning with the laying of the report. The first six-monthly report on the costs of the identity card scheme is due on 30 September but, because of the dates of recess,it will be laid before Parliament on their return on9 October 2006.

David Hanson: This statement sets out my plans to reform liquor licensing law in Northern Ireland. The last review of the law governing liquor licensing and registered clubs took place some 10 years ago. Since then the social and economic climate in Northern Ireland has changed and improved immensely. The peace dividend has altered the shape of the tourism and hospitality sectors and of town and city centres. There is great potential for further growth, and liquor licensing law must keep pace with these developments and with modern expectations.
	Coupled with that is the need for a more transparent, accountable and better regulated framework for the licensed trade. There are clear anomalies in the current licensing system and a requirement for greater enforcement powers for the Police Service of Northern Ireland to deal with breaches of licensing law.
	The consultation on proposed changes to the existing legislation was launched in November 2005. Since then I have had a number of discussions with political representatives and other interested parties. There has been support from both local political parties and the licensed trade for many of my proposals. Concerns have been expressed by politicians and parts of the licensed trade regarding two of the proposed changes. These are the transfer of responsibility for liquor licensing from courts to district councils and the abolition of the 'surrender' principle. I welcome the views that have been put and now confirm that my plans for the reform of the law on liquor licensing and registered clubs in Northern Ireland are as follows:
	The introduction of six new objectives to underpin licensing policy, legislation and regulation. These are—Promotion of public health; Promotion of public safety; Prevention of crime and disorder; Prevention of public nuisance; Protection of children from harm; Fair treatment of all stakeholders.
	New, more effective enforcement measures, including immediate temporary closure powers for the police, a penalty points system for licensees who break the law and new council liquor licensing officers.
	Moving responsibility for granting and renewing licences and certificates of registration from courts to district councils, leading to a more accountable, transparent system.
	Replacing the current twelve categories of licences in favour of a dual system of personal and premises licences.
	Abolishing the provision which requires an existing licence for a pub or off-licence to be "surrendered" to a court before a new one may be granted. This will be subject to an assessment of the business impact of my proposal which will help decide how this is addressed in the second stage of reforms. I hope it will be the Northern Ireland Assembly that will consider these matters.
	A voluntary proof-of-age scheme and more flexibility to allow under-18s in certified licensed premises and registered clubs when accompanied by responsible adults.
	A modest extension of current opening hours for licensed premises and registered clubs, creating scope for opening up to 2.00am Monday to Saturday. Sunday opening hours will remain unchanged as will opening hours for off-licences.
	Revoking the financial controls and accounts formats for registered clubs, prescribed in the Registration of Clubs (Accounts) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1997, in favour of best practice guidance.
	The proposals will give police the powers they need to crack down on irresponsible drinkers and rogue traders and make the licensing system more transparent and accountable, giving communities more information and a louder voice in decision-making.
	Allowing licensed premises and registered clubs to apply to the courts to extend their opening hours up to 2.00am is the result of careful consideration of the changes in people's social habits and the opportunities available for developing the night time economy. I have listened very carefully to the arguments made by the licensed trade, the police, health interests and others, and balanced the economic and social advantages of extending opening hours with the public interest and public safety. Accordingly, I have decided that opening to 2.00am will be available to those licensed premises entitled under existing law to apply for later opening but not to off-licensed premises.
	Transferring responsibility for granting liquor licences and club certificates from a court-based system to district councils will create a more accountable system where pubs, off-licences, registered clubs and other licensees will have to explain in detail how their businesses will support the six licensing objectives. There have been concerns expressed about the ability of councils to administer a new liquor licensing system. However, councils already operate a number of regulatory systems including entertainments licensing and street trading, and their range of responsibilities will be greatly enhanced under the Review of Public Administration. The capacity of new councils to undertake these new responsibilities is an issue that is being addressed in the period leading up to thefull implementation of the Review of Public Administration. I wish to reassure those concerned that responsibility for liquor licensing will only move to councils once they have built the capacity to administer the new system.
	The new system will operate under clear guidelines that will be issued to councils. They will be required to produce a statement of licensing policy that clearly articulates how they plan to control liquor licensing in line with the six licensing objectives. There will be further safeguards. Before councils reach a decision they will have to seek the views of responsible authorities and interested parties such as the Police Service of Northern Ireland, local residents and local businesses. All applications for a licence will be open to objection and a licence may be reviewed, revoked or suspended at any time if there is cause for concern. Those seeking a premises licence will be required to produce an operating plan setting out the nature of the business for approval by councils, and the need for any new licence will have to be clearly demonstrated.
	I am replacing the current twelve categories of licence with a dual system of personal and premises licences. This will result in a more robust licensing regime. Personal licences are being introduced for the first time to ensure that those managing licensed premises have accredited qualifications and demonstrate clean backgrounds. This will improve operating standards across the licensed trade and protect against infiltration by those involved in organised crime.
	The surrender provision has created anomalies in the licensed trade. At present only pubs and off-licences are required to surrender a licence before being granted a new one. This has capped the overall number of such premises in Northern Ireland, but it has not prevented the growth of alcohol sales in other premises such as large hotels, nor the clustering of pubs and off-licences in particular areas. It is also an artificial barrier to entry to the market and its abolition will create a more equitable commercial environment.
	I have listened to the views of local politicians and parts of the licensed trade about the implications of the abolition of surrender. In response to their concerns, I will commission an assessment of the business impact of abolition before making any further decision on the way forward.
	I intend to implement some of the proposals as soon as possible. Those relating to enforcement, opening hours, children and registered clubs' accounts should come into effect by Christmas 2007, and draft legislation will be consulted on in autumn 2006.
	With regard to the move to councils, I intend to defer the consideration of this aspect of the legislation, along with some of the other proposals that depend on the new system being operational, to a second, later legislative vehicle. The Review of Public Administration is due for completion in 2009 and the target date for making legislation to transfer responsibility for licensing from courts to district councils and for the introduction of new licensing objectives will be linked to this. This tranche of legislation will also see the abolition of the existing categories of licence and, subject to an impact assessment, the surrender provision. The final decisions on this will hopefully be taken by a devolved Assembly, should it be successfully restored.
	I believe this is a balanced package of measures that weighs up the rights, needs and demands of the various interested parties. They will bring licensing law in Northern Ireland up to date, both to deal more effectively with the alcohol-related problems we currently face and to meet modern day expectations. They will result in a more democratic approach that allows local people to have greater influence in how and where the licensed trade operates. They will promote a safe, welcoming environment in town and city centres where the evening and night-time economy can flourish and will encourage investment, variety and high standards of service in the hospitality, tourism and entertainment sectors.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The Insolvency Service plans to deal with some 72,000 new insolvencies in the year to 31 March 2007 including a significant increase in personal bankruptcies. Its planning assumption for the level of redundancy payments and other, insolvency-related claims is 95,000.
	In support of the policy that bankrupts who can make a contribution for the benefit of their creditors should do so, official receivers have been asked to ensure that, as last year, at least 17 per cent. of bankrupts agree or are ordered to make such payments. Action will continue to be taken against bankrupts and company directors in respect of financial misconduct or dishonesty and Companies Investigation Branch, part of the Agency from 1 April 2006, will continue to investigate the affairs of companies in the public interest.
	The Service's new financial regime, put in place by the Enterprise Act 2002 will be reviewed in this, its third year and it is likely that new targets relating to unit costs and fees will be agreed as a result. The Service is required to balance its case administration costs and income over the three-year period.
	I have also set the Insolvency Service the following targets for the year 2006-07:
	
		
			  Target 
			 Increase the level of user satisfaction index to 90 per cent. 
			 Increase the level of public confidence in the service's enforcement regime to 60 per cent. 
			 Ensure the average time for concluding disqualification proceedings is no longer than 26 months 
			 Complete internal section 447 investigationswithin 90 days of commencementwithin 180 days of commencement 60 per cent.90 per cent. 
			 Reduce the unit cost of redundancy payment processing by 31 March 2007 from the 2005-06 baselineandProcess redundancy payment claims for payment within 3 per cent. 
			 3 Weeks 78 per cent. 
			 6 weeks 92 per cent. 
		
	
	In addition to these targets the service is required to meet centrally promulgates targets relating to replying from correspondence from hon. Members, making payment to suppliers and reducing sick absence levels.

Alistair Darling: UK Trade & Investment (UKTI) launched today its new 5-year strategy entitled "Prosperity in a Changing World". This strategy sets out how UKTI will respond to the enhanced role envisaged in the Budget.
	The new strategy describes how UKTI will take the lead to maximise the UK's ability to attract foreign direct investment, win market share in the new high growth economies, and help business internationalise in a globalised world. It will lead Government efforts to:
	Market the UK overseas as a key business partner and as the preferred location for inward investment;
	boost UK trade with, and secure investment from, emerging economies such as China and India;
	promote the UK's financial services sector and the City of London as the world's leading international financial centre;
	lobby overseas on regulatory issues and barriers to trade and investment;
	target innovative R&D-intensive companies both for inward investment and as potential exporters.
	It outlines plans for UKTI to reform itself to become a more streamlined, entrepreneurial organisation, focusing on the ever-changing needs of its clients. UKTI will spearhead a more professional approach to marketing the strengths of the UK economy. It will allocate resources to frontline services where they can be most effective in adding value to the UK economy.
	I am arranging for copies of the UKTI 5-year strategy to be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Ian McCartney: The Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission published a report on partnership law reform in November 2003 (Law Com No 283; Scot Law ComNo 192). It included recommendations in respect of general partnership law and limited partnership law, together with a draft Bill designed to replace both the Partnership Act 1890 and the Limited Partnerships Act 1907. I am very grateful for the Law Commissions' detailed and thorough work.
	The DTI followed this with a consultation document on the economic impact of reform of partnership law. Respondents to the consultation were divided on the economic benefits of the proposed reforms to the business community. A summary of responses is being published on the DTI website at:
	http://www.dti.gov.uk/bbf/corp-governance/partnership/page25911.html.
	Copies are available in the Libraries of both Houses.
	The Government have carefully considered the report from the Law Commissions and the consultation responses and intend to bring forward proposals for the reform of limited partnership law based on the Law Commissions' recommendations. The recommendations for limited partnership reform have been widely supported and there is a strong economic case for taking them forward. The reforms are not dependent on the proposed reforms for general partnership law which the Government have decided not to take forward at this time.
	The Government aim to take forward the reforms to limited partnership law by means of a Regulatory Reform Order when Parliamentary time allows, and to publish a consultation document containing draft clauses shortly.

Stephen Ladyman: On the 19 July last year I announced that I had asked the Highways Agency to carry out a detailed review to allow an informed decision to be taken on the case for building a new tolled Expressway to run parallel with the M6 between Birmingham and Manchester as an alternative to widening the existing M6 by one lane in each direction. This followed a consultation exercise undertaken in 2004 on the broad concept of an Expressway.
	The Government had accepted the need for more road capacity in this corridor, as shown by the Midlands to Manchester multi-modal study (Midman), which reported in July 2002. The issue was how best that capacity could be provided. Given the high level of investment involved whatever option would be taken forward, it was clearly important that we properly considered the potential for the extra benefits that might be achievable from an Expressway.
	The 2004 consultation document "M6: giving motorists a choice" suggested that the Expressway might be delivered more quickly than the widening, by avoiding the need to build new structures such as bridges, and avoid substantial disruption to traffic during construction. The evidence from the detailed development work undertaken by the Highways Agency has not borne this out.
	The Highways Agency's modelling suggests that an Expressway would have a significant impact on both the levels and the mix of traffic using the Expressway and the M6. In particular, it is likely that the proportion of heavy freight traffic on the M6—which is already relatively high—would increase further, requiring additional infrastructure works at junctions to provide safely for traffic joining and leaving the road. This, together with providing for the appropriate range of access options at each junction between the Expressway and the existing M6, would require the demolition of many existing structures and reconstruction of 20 per cent. of the existing carriageway. The Expressway would also have a much larger land take, requiring some 50 per cent. more land than the widening. The Expressway and associated works would cause more disruption to existing traffic and would cost some 15 per cent. more than widening.
	Although on-line widening would necessarily involve some disruption to M6 traffic during construction, the phasing of works could mean additional capacity being provided sooner than an entirely new road, with efforts focused on the most heavily trafficked sections first.
	The Highways Agency has held a series of seminars and meetings with stakeholders, to set out indicative plans for both options, and take feedback. On the basis of these more clearly defined propositions, few stakeholders regarded the Expressway as an attractive alternative to widening.
	In the light of the further development work and stakeholder consultation, we have therefore decided not to pursue the Expressway alternative any further.
	The Highways Agency has continued to progress the widening option and will now focus solely on that. This work will include examining the demand management measures needed to ensure that the benefits of additional capacity are locked-in.
	A more detailed report on the options review has been placed in the Library of the House.

Douglas Alexander: In his statement on 21 November, thethen Secretary of State for Transport announcedthe Government's intention to commission an independent, wide-ranging review of policing at airports. He subsequently appointed Stephen Boys Smith, a former senior civil servant, to lead the review.
	The review was tasked with identifying a sustainable approach to the policing of airports which takes account of the roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders and, in particular, addresses the needfor funding arrangements that are objective and transparent.
	The review was about airport policing not airport security, which had already been considered by Sir John Wheeler's review in 2002. Wheeler recognised that the "designation" of airports for policing purposes was an issue and saw the implementation of a Multi-Agency Threat and Risk Assessment (MATRA) process as fundamental in modernising that process. MATRA is in place at over 40 UK airports and the present review has considered whether the process of designation should now be replaced, given the changes implemented following the Wheeler review.
	The review report has now been submitted to both my Department and the Home Office. We welcome its broad thrust and will be working closely with key stakeholders to consider the recommendations in detail.
	The review has identified areas where we can build on the good work already being done by all stakeholders at our airports. It makes recommendations in a number of areas:
	It endorses the principle of joint accountability for airport security and the concept of airports as "communities" where stakeholders must work together in full partnership to protect against a range of threats.
	It recommends continued and enhanced liaison between key stakeholders, including Government Departments, the Police Service and airport operators at both national and local level to maintain a consistent understanding of and response to threats and risks.
	It endorses the current Multi-Agency Threat and Risk Assessment (MATRA) approach already in place at UK airports and recommends that it is strengthened further.
	It recommends the system of "designation" is discontinued and that policing costs should generally be met by the industry on the basis that policing forms part of an agreed airport "community" response, that costs are clear and transparent, and that policing at airports is brought within the mainstream policing agenda.
	Although this review has not focused on aviation security measures it is concerned with a key element in the wider protection of our airports against a range of threats including from terrorism and serious and organised crime. Given these considerations, it is naturally not a report for public circulation. I intend to make a further statement in due course.

Douglas Alexander: On 11 October 2005 my predecessor, the right hon. Member for Edinburgh South-West, (Mr. Darling) announced his decision to review the role of the British Transport Police (BTP). The review, which has been carried out in consultation with interested parties including rail operators, passenger representative groups, the BTP, the BTP Authority and other policing organisations, has now concluded.
	The review has examined a range of options in relation to the future policing of the railways, including transferring the function to local police forces and various options for expanding or re-focusing the role of the BTP. It has also considered the relationship between the work carried out by the BTP and the requirements of the rail industry.
	I have concluded that there remains a strong case for retaining a national specialist police force for the railways. The BTP plays an important role in combating crime and helping to deter potential terrorist activity on the rail network. The review has confirmed the effectiveness of the force in its key role and, in particular, that its specialist knowledge of the operation of the railway is an important asset. I have therefore decided not to make any structural changes to the way in which the policing of the railways is carried out.
	However, the review has identified a need for greater clarity in detailed aspects of BTP's operation in relation to its responsibilities to the rail industry, the rail industry's own duties and the role of local police forces.
	I therefore propose to write to the chairman of the BTP authority and the chief constable of the BTP asking them to ensure that the force's resources are focused on areas where the BTP can provide maximum added value to the fight against crime on the railway. I will be asking them to establish how the role and responsibilities of the BTP relative to those of other forces can be clarified and, where necessary, revised and incorporated into current protocols between BTP and local forces.
	I will also be asking them to develop a more structured partnership approach between the force and the rail industry focused on agreed needs and priorities. This will require all stakeholders to interact more effectively at all levels, in particular at the local level to ensure that local issues and concerns are addressed. Bespoke neighbourhood policing for the railway community and enhanced communication between the train companies and the BTP will help ensure that the policing service is tailored more effectively to meet local needs.
	I have also decided to increase the membership of the British Transport Police Authority to enhance scrutiny of the force's resource requirements and to strengthen the industry's input to the authority's management and oversight of the efficiency and effectiveness of the force. I will be appointing two additional industry members.
	The review has also considered the arrangements for funding the BTP. I have concluded that the BTP should remain largely funded by the rail industry. The Government will continue to consider providing additional central funding for specific projects and initiatives undertaken by the BTP which provide benefits beyond the railway environment.

John Hutton: On 16 May I announced that my Department and the Association of British Insurers (ABI), the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL), and the Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA) had agreed to work together to identify urgently ways in which we can speed the settlement of claims for those suffering from mesothelioma. I said that I would report on progress before Parliament rises for the summer recess.
	More stakeholders have also been involved in this work, such as the Trades Union Congress (TUC) and the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) and we have also kept other interested parties informed.
	Since then, the Government have introduced amendments to the Compensation Bill to reverse the effects of the Law Lords ruling on Barker v Corus. This would have caused delays in resolving claims and made it more difficult for mesothelioma sufferers to recover full compensation. We are changing the law to make it easier for them to get full compensation as quickly as possible.
	These new provisions would also enable certain changes to be made to the financial services compensation scheme, which should considerably speed up payment of claims to mesothelioma victims and produce a fair outcome for insurers.
	Today I announce interim measures to speed up current claims handling for mesothelioma sufferers. I am also confirming that we will put in place a long term solution. This work will start now and I will provide a further update on progress in the autumn. We are committed to having a full dialogue and we will invite comments from all interested parties.
	Looking forward, we have identified a number of interim measures that can be implemented relatively quickly and will speed up the settlement of claims across the UK:
	Our partners are developing a standard claim letter that should be in place by October.
	We are drafting a leaflet for those diagnosed with mesothelioma to explain the help available to them and where to find it.
	In July, DWP will clarify with claims handlers best practice for ensuring priority for industrial injuries disablement benefits for those with mesothelioma.
	Also in July, DWP will work with Revenue and Customs to address tracing employer records more quickly.
	To support the code of practice for tracing Employers' Liability Compulsory Insurance (ELCI) policies, ABI will introduce a phone enquiries helpline in the autumn and will also issue guidance on how to get the best out of the code.
	We will review the code of practice for tracing ELCI policies to ensure that the code is comprehensive and has the confidence of users.
	ABI will spread best practice within the wider insurance industry with a claims handling best practice guide.
	Partners will consider further public awareness activity to encourage claimants to use qualified, experienced legal practitioners when making a claim.
	We will continue to work with our partners to ensure that these short-term outcomes are delivered quickly as we develop options for future change.

James Plaskitt: The Department for Work and Pensions ran a number of small-scale Post Office card account pilots between 13 February and 10 March 2006. The pilots tested various approaches to moving people from having their benefit or pension paid into a Post Office card account to payments into a bank account, and they have provided us with some useful information on how customers react.
	We have already shared the key findings with Post Office Ltd. to help them identify customer needs as they develop new savings and banking products which are likely to be more attractive to many of their customers than the current Post Office card account. Post Office Ltd. plan to start a three month trial next week when it will be writing to 10,000 existing Post Office card account customers to encourage them to open one of its new instant saver accounts.
	Among the key findings from the DWP pilots were:
	Many customers were not aware that they could use their bank account at the Post Office. This is not just an issue for those receiving a benefit or pension. There are around20 million people who could access their bank account at a Post Office, but only around 10 per cent. (2 million) per week actually do so. This is a huge untapped market which could bring vital new income into Post Office branches. DWP will work with Post Office Ltd. and support it in its efforts to increase this market;
	once customers had moved from the Post Office card account and become used to their new routine, the vast majority(85 per cent.) were happy using a bank account rather than a Post Office card account. Customers like the additional features of bank accounts and the flexibility to get their money when and where they want; and
	there are opportunities for Post Office Ltd. to respond positively to customer demand by providing new products which offer more features than the Post Office card account. Customers need to be properly informed of all of their options and the services that the Post Office offers.
	We will continue to discuss with Post Office Ltd. and other key stakeholders how the needs of customers can continue to be met after the Post Office card account contract ends in 2010. DWP officials will also be discussing the findings from the pilots and our future payments strategy with customer representative groups and other key stakeholders over the next few months.
	Our commitment to allowing people to continue to collect their benefit or pension in cash at the Post Office if they wish remains unchanged. Around25 different bank accounts can be accessed at Post Office branches now, and we hope there could be more in the future, as well as new Post Office products.
	I am placing a report of the pilot findings in the Library of the House.